Dispelling Backblaze's HDD Reliability Myth - The Real Story Covered - Page 2 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #31 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 01:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Who is talking about Seagate ? I'm not. I missed this part, and why you are making this jump. I thought we were bashing on Mfusick because he does not like WD 5400rpm because they cost more, have serious reliability concerns in some cases, and generally poor performance. I have (and still do) recommend the Seagate models because they work great and they are cheap, but I recommend the Hitachi and the Toshiba just the same for the same reasons. The only reason why Seagate was more popular was because the drives are often cheaper and more easily available (on sale more often). Non of this has anything to do with OCZ or SSD's IMO.

You're trying to combine two separate issues.

It's been pointed out several times that the majority of your criticisms towards WD are irrational and unfounded. That mostly centered around the nonsense about how they label their drives (as plainly as anyone could reasonably ask) You've repeatedly and insistently stated that you hate WD. If you don't believe me, I'll provide quotes.

You've also repeatedly and insistently stated how much you hate 5400rpm drives. And you've tried to defend that stance with nothing but irrational rhetoric. If you don't believe me, I'll provide you with quotes.

Claiming to be brand agnostic while also spreading vitriol about a particular brand is not a good way to spread helpful advice. Making broad generalizations based on other broad (and oft incorrect) generalizations is not a good way to spread helpful advice among the community. If someone caught me giving out bad advice, I sincerely hope they'd do everything they could to make sure I was corrected as well as anyone who might have been listening to my bad advice.

You continue to claim that you haven't said anything like that and if you don't understand how "5400rpm drives are crappy" or "5400rpm drives suck" can be considered bad advice and not just an ambiguously worded opinion, then perhaps you might want to brush up English. I'm not sure what else to tell you in that regard.

As far as the generalizations that you've made to come to your ambiguously worded opinion...

1) 5400rpm drives are always slower than their faster-spindled counterparts. That is not always true. I've provided benchmarks to prove it.
But even when some 5400rpm drives do end up being slower...
2) Faster drives translate to faster system performance. That's is not always true. Again, benchmarks and common sense have been provided in the past
But even when the faster drive does translate to faster system performance...
3) Faster system performance is the top priority for those looking to purchase new drives. That is not always true. Price, heat, noise and plenty of other factors can be at the top of a given person's list of criteria.

All of those are assumptions that must be made (incorrectly so) to state flatly that 5400rpm drives suck.


Quote:
I like to talk about this stuff. I like to be accurate about it. I even like when data is shown that shows I am wrong; I like learning and discussing this stuff. What I absolutely hate is when you try to make the conversation about me and not about the technology of HTPC. Why the continual personalization of everything ? Why do you focus the conversation so much about me, and tearing me down ??? I'd love if you posted your own opinion, and why you feel that way, provided some data that supported it. That's much better IMO than trying continually to post nonsense aimed at discrediting me or my opinion. But alas this is why we can't have nice things. This isn't a personal debate and nor should it be so it does bother me when you try to make it out to be that. Let's just stick to the real facts and talking about HTPC technology. If you think my opinion is wrong, or you disagree with it post your own, support it and let people decide for themselves. That's what forums like this are for. They are not for personal grudge matches and bickering. If your goal is to balance the public perception against my own opinion on something, stating your own opinion and backing it up with data is a much more effective and helpful way of doing that than trying to personally tear me or my opinion down. Sorry to vent some frustration here but I think you need some awareness about how much your posting has degraded. I miss the old posting you used to do that was helpful and informative.

Some hypothetical random imaginary guy says: "5400rpm drives suck"

Some other hypothetical random imaginary guy says: "Well, that's not entirely true..."

First hypothetical random imaginary guy replies "But that's just my opinion!" (Note the italicized part right there. It just became personal.)

Second hypothetical random imaginary guy responds "Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but it still isn't entirely correct."

First hypothetical random imaginary guy replies "Hey man, don't make this about me!"

The first hypothetical random imaginary guy can't have it both ways. If he wants to throw his personal opinions out there (especially when delivered ambiguously in such a way as they could be construed as statements of fact) his personal opinions are subject to scrutiny. If he doesn't want his personal opinions scrutinized, he would be better off sticking with the facts.
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 05:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

You're trying to combine two separate issues.

It's been pointed out several times that the majority of your criticisms towards WD are irrational and unfounded. That mostly centered around the nonsense about how they label their drives (as plainly as anyone could reasonably ask) You've repeatedly and insistently stated that you hate WD. If you don't believe me, I'll provide quotes.

You've also repeatedly and insistently stated how much you hate 5400rpm drives. And you've tried to defend that stance with nothing but irrational rhetoric. If you don't believe me, I'll provide you with quotes.

Claiming to be brand agnostic while also spreading vitriol about a particular brand is not a good way to spread helpful advice. Making broad generalizations based on other broad (and oft incorrect) generalizations is not a good way to spread helpful advice among the community. If someone caught me giving out bad advice, I sincerely hope they'd do everything they could to make sure I was corrected as well as anyone who might have been listening to my bad advice.

You continue to claim that you haven't said anything like that and if you don't understand how "5400rpm drives are crappy" or "5400rpm drives suck" can be considered bad advice and not just an ambiguously worded opinion, then perhaps you might want to brush up English. I'm not sure what else to tell you in that regard.

As far as the generalizations that you've made to come to your ambiguously worded opinion...

1) 5400rpm drives are always slower than their faster-spindled counterparts. That is not always true. I've provided benchmarks to prove it.
But even when some 5400rpm drives do end up being slower...
2) Faster drives translate to faster system performance. That's is not always true. Again, benchmarks and common sense have been provided in the past
But even when the faster drive does translate to faster system performance...
3) Faster system performance is the top priority for those looking to purchase new drives. That is not always true. Price, heat, noise and plenty of other factors can be at the top of a given person's list of criteria.

All of those are assumptions that must be made (incorrectly so) to state flatly that 5400rpm drives suck.
Some hypothetical random imaginary guy says: "5400rpm drives suck"

Some other hypothetical random imaginary guy says: "Well, that's not entirely true..."

First hypothetical random imaginary guy replies "But that's just my opinion!" (Note the italicized part right there. It just became personal.)

Second hypothetical random imaginary guy responds "Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but it still isn't entirely correct."

First hypothetical random imaginary guy replies "Hey man, don't make this about me!"

The first hypothetical random imaginary guy can't have it both ways. If he wants to throw his personal opinions out there (especially when delivered ambiguously in such a way as they could be construed as statements of fact) his personal opinions are subject to scrutiny. If he doesn't want his personal opinions scrutinized, he would be better off sticking with the facts.

Can we sticky this post and just refer to it each and every time this subject comes back up?

Very nicely put.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

assassin is offline  
post #33 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 06:28 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
The problem with his post is he fabricates or imagines things I say. He's too black and white (which makes him look correct) on a subject that's many shades of grey.

I'll try to correct him with the truth without being wordy what I actually say and believe:

- I don't hate WD. Not at all. I'd happily buy their non 5400rpm drives if they made them and the drives were available to me at reasonably good prices.
- I do strongly dislike WD 5400rpm drives. He is correct on that.
- 5400rpm drives are generally much slower. This is true and correct much more often than it is not. If its not true the faster spindle drive is probably a poor choice anyways because its low tech or old tech. If you find that modern 4TB 5400rpm drive with 1TB platters and compare it to a faster spindle drive and the faster spindle is slower there's a reason why and that reason might be its old tech or many generations old. Otherwise you are splitting hairs on something that's semantics like a low speed Seagate NAS vs a low speed WD RED that for all intensive purposes are the same style drive and same performance.

-top performance isn't the most important consideration. It's one of many secondary considerations behind price. Paying a ton more for better performance is a poor choice in my opinion, but if the better performance is free or cheaper it's probably foolish not to take it. It just so happens that generally Seagate, Hitachi, and Toshiba 2TB, 3TB, and 4TB drives are available cheaper than WD with better performance. When the WD RED is $99 and the others are $30 more I will apologize for my generalities on this, but it's always the exact opposite from what I've seen. Furthermore my personal objection is towards spending more money on the slower drive for no reason rather than trying to push the faster ones like you assume.

-many modern drives in faster spindle speeds have improved significantly in not just performance but also energy efficiencies, thermal performance, and noise. Many modern non 5400rpm drives excel actually at these areas due to newer advanced tech and design. This isn't 2010 anymore where you need to buy a 2TB WD GREEN 5400rpm because every 7200rpm drive is a hot loud energy pig. The truth is almost all faster spindles with modern tech outperform that 2TB GREEN today at energy and noise, and probably heat. I do agree you need to look beyond the spindle speed and into these other factors for and intelligent decision based on intended use, but all this stuff is secondary to price IMO. Paying $30 more for a drive that's 1 degree cooler and .3 watts less power is senseless. In the old days the difference was 5 watts and 10 degrees. I'm advocating awareness about this and suggesting yesterday's thinking on hard drives doesn't apply today. If the drive remains inside the optimal temp range that's all that matters. No one will notice a single watt or less power difference on the consumer level. My ipad uses more power typing this.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #34 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 07:02 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
- If you don't hate WD, why have you repeatedly said you hate WD, and listed things about WD which you hate? Your signature is starting to ring true.
- There you go mixing WD and the 5400rpm thing again. It's like you can't say anything bad without finding a way to stick WD's name in somehow.
- Yes. 5400rpm drives are generally slower. But you don't bother to make that same distinction with your 5400rpm hate speech. You don't say 5400rpm drives are generally crappy. (which would still be silly, but at least allow you some wiggle room. Hating slow drives would make a lot more sense) You've repeatedly stated that 5400rpm drives are crappy and 5400rpm drives suck.
- Again, I haven't seen any little asterisks behind your "5400rpm drives suck" claims where you say overpriced 5400rpm drives suck. When you just say 5400rpm drives suck, the only thing you're evidently commenting on to an observer that hasn't been following this, is the performance.
- You can't have it both ways. You can't say that 5400rpm drives are slower, if you compare similar generations and tech, and then turn around and say how they've advanced drives so new 7200rpm drives are more energy efficient, and cooler etc. That same technology still applies regardless of the spindle speed.

A few final thoughts...

The whole problem here is that you insist on making a black and white claim (5400rpm drives are crappy) and I've continued to point out to you that it is not black and white. Not the other way around as you claim.

Every time this discussion that you claim to find so unpleasant fades away, you're the one that brings it back up again. I believe it was Bill Shakespeare that said "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

And finally, if you think I've fabricated anything specific, just say the word, I'll be happy to provide full, in-context quotes.
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #35 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 07:42 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
What's your favorite HDD brand ?

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #36 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 07:49 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
I don't have a favorite hard drive brand. It's pretty self evident by the fact that I'm not on here constantly plugging one brand over another.
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #37 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 07:57 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
So we agree then. Can we stop now?

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #38 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 08:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

So we agree then. Can we stop now?

We agree on what? This:

Quote:
- If you don't hate WD, why have you repeatedly said you hate WD, and listed things about WD which you hate? Your signature is starting to ring true.
- There you go mixing WD and the 5400rpm thing again. It's like you can't say anything bad without finding a way to stick WD's name in somehow.
- Yes. 5400rpm drives are generally slower. But you don't bother to make that same distinction with your 5400rpm hate speech. You don't say 5400rpm drives are generally crappy. (which would still be silly, but at least allow you some wiggle room. Hating slow drives would make a lot more sense) You've repeatedly stated that 5400rpm drives are crappy and 5400rpm drives suck.
- Again, I haven't seen any little asterisks behind your "5400rpm drives suck" claims where you say overpriced 5400rpm drives suck. When you just say 5400rpm drives suck, the only thing you're evidently commenting on to an observer that hasn't been following this, is the performance.
- You can't have it both ways. You can't say that 5400rpm drives are slower, if you compare similar generations and tech, and then turn around and say how they've advanced drives so new 7200rpm drives are more energy efficient, and cooler etc. That same technology still applies regardless of the spindle speed.

A few final thoughts...

The whole problem here is that you insist on making a black and white claim (5400rpm drives are crappy) and I've continued to point out to you that it is not black and white. Not the other way around as you claim.

Every time this discussion that you claim to find so unpleasant fades away, you're the one that brings it back up again. I believe it was Bill Shakespeare that said "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

And finally, if you think I've fabricated anything specific, just say the word, I'll be happy to provide full, in-context quotes.

When you just blurt out that we agree, I'd like to know what it is we are agreeing on.

But yeah, we can stop this any time you want... just like we stopped the last few times.... until you bring it up again, and we do the cha-cha one more time.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #39 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 10:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
Too many words ^ did not read.

I meant agree that neither of us have a favorite brand hard drive so none of this matters so we can stop the bickering.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #40 of 129 Old 02-04-2014, 02:52 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Too many words ^ did not read.

I meant agree that neither of us have a favorite brand hard drive so none of this matters so we can stop the bickering.

Did I miss something?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

assassin is offline  
post #41 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 08:15 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
The drive with the highest fail rate, ST31500341AS (25.4%), is a Seagate 7200.11 drive from 2008. A six years old model using three 500GB platters. This makes me doubt there are any useful conclusions to be drawn from this drive's survivability when compared to newer 1TB per platter drives. It is clearly an outlier which you can't use to judge Seagate's reliability in general, especially that of their current drives. The second highest failure rate was on ST31500541AS (9.8%), much improved over the -341AS. But even this one is a five year old model, not exactly relevant any more.

The Seagate ST4000DM000 is a new drive with 3.8% failure rate, similar to WD's numbers on the RED. The WD RED is not well tested (only 346) and only in 3TB sizes. Who knows how the 4TB model stacks up?

The popular 7200.14 001 that people buy like crazy for $99 is not even included in the results. I don't think these results should be taken as "Seagate sucks", because one has to look at each model separately instead of blindly trusting one brand over another, and also weigh the cost of the drive and the length of its warranty against the likelihood of it failing. If one drive is 30% cheaper then is the smart move to spend the extra on a drive you think might be slightly more reliable ??? I don't think so. Save you cash and buy another drive for backup seems a lot safer.

I really want to see the next round of data from back blaze that should include the Seagate 3TB with 1TB platters, the Toshiba 3TB with 1tb platters, and a better showing of the 3TB WD RED.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #42 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 08:19 AM
Member
 
groove93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Statesboro, GA
Posts: 193
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
I RMA'd my Seagate 3tb drive over the weekend. My replacement has been "back ordered" , go figure.

rolleyes.gif
groove93 is offline  
post #43 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 08:22 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
I did an RMA on two Samsung drives on Thursday last week and I got the replacements for Seagate yesterday. Seagate bought Samsung HDD so I got Seagates back for the Sammy's I sent.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #44 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 08:41 AM
Member
 
wsume99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 82
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

The popular 7200.14 001 that people buy like crazy for $99 is not even included in the results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I really want to see the next round of data from back blaze that should include the Seagate 3TB with 1TB platters, the Toshiba 3TB with 1tb platters, and a better showing of the 3TB WD RED.
No need to wait on the Seagate results ... go back and read the Backblaze post again. It includes over 4200 of the ST3000DM001 which is the 7200.14 001 that you are referring to with 3 x 1TB platters running at 7200 rpm. I'm guessing they have so many because they are normally the cheapest 3TB drive you can find. The average age of their drives was 1.4 years and the AFR is ~10%. Not very impressive IMO considering the 3TB Hitachi (HDS5C3030ALA630) shows up with nearly the exact same number of drives, has a longer average age (1.7 years), and an AFR of ~1%. So it is an order of magnitude better than the "modern" Seagate 1TB platter drive.
wsume99 is offline  
post #45 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 09:08 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
No doubt the Hitachi are impressive. Very impressive. The results of this study would lead my to purchase one of those models if they were available for a reasonable price. I'm not sure it's worth $50+ though. Just like I don't think the WD RED is worth $40 more either. Perhaps the Hitachi ultrastar model (5 year warranty + 2.0million MFBF rating) might be, the results of the Hitachi combined with a double endurance rating from the MFG and nearly double the warranty does have some value I think.

The most interesting to me will be the rebage Hitachi (Toshiba TB) since I am curious if it hold up like the real Hitachi does. Those drives are $99 each at Newegg and Microcenter for the 3TB and they are 7200rpm too. I have a couple and I'm really happy with them. I think if those Toshiba 3TB turn out to have the same reliability as the Hitachi 3TB 7k4000's I'll be even happier.

I just wonder if the Hitachi reliability is better because the drives were bought OEM and shipped and handled correctly, while the majority of the Seagates seem to have been "shucked" and in some cases people bought them at Costco and other retailers and then shipped them to Backblaze. If mishandling effects reliability then that would be a shame. Same for the fact the older storage PODS seem to have more vibration which will kill a HDD fast, especially one without anti vibration features. Hitachi has excellent anti vibration issues so perhaps that is why they last so good ???

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #46 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 09:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Andy_Steb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 1,017
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked: 152
They can't even use the WD greens. If you ask me that means they have a 100% failure rate. Bakeblaze has some issues with their setup and vibration.

They throw out a bunch of numbers and pretty charts, but IMHO this whole study is meaningless.
Mfusick likes this.

Andy_Steb is online now  
post #47 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I don't think these results should be taken as "Seagate sucks", because one has to look at each model separately instead of blindly trusting one brand over another,

Weren't you blindly recommending some random Hitachi drives, proclaiming the reliability of the brand, despite a lack of reliability studies for the model recommended... what.. about 2 days ago? Or did I imagine that?
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #48 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 06:23 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy_Steb View Post

They can't even use the WD greens. If you ask me that means they have a 100% failure rate. Bakeblaze has some issues with their setup and vibration.

They throw out a bunch of numbers and pretty charts, but IMHO this whole study is meaningless.

I agree 100%

It's interesting to see the data and results but it's not very reliable or applicable in a purchase decision. I like to look at the data, but I don't take it too seriously. I will still buy Seagate drives without hesitation because I've had such good luck with them personally. I'm over 20 of them without a single issue and my older ones are a few years old already.

I've had terrible luck with WD GREEN. I have literally RMA every single one I owned (12 of them) inside a couple years time. Not to mention they are slow, which is always a negative I notice when using them. If they can't even use them for their study because they throw errors and don't work that probably does not mean they are bad for a simple storage drive, just the same as if they hammer on "shucked" Seagates in noisy vibration prone pods and get a 9% failure rate. Neither of those things would translate to the end consumer directly or with certainty.

The Hitachi durability aspect is interesting to me though. I do have a gut feeling there is something there. Hitachi doing well in a flawed study doesn't exactly mean they are not good, or they would not do as well in a less flawed study. At least specifically for the models they tested, it appears to be a solid choice. 1% failure rate across thousands of drives, and a few different sizes and models speaks volumes IMO. If there was any take away from that study it would be that the Hitachi models they test are probably pretty good.

Recently I have recommended the Toshiba 3TB, the Seagate 3TB and the Hitachi 3TB / 4TB models and apparently ajheib thinks that is wrong (I am not sure why), or that I have a brand preference. rolleyes.gif I doubt anyone around here has more different brands currently in operation than me. You name it and I have it. I think the only model I have never recommended once is the WD RED on this forum. I'm batting 100% on avoiding that so far because I've never come across a situation where I did not feel there was a better alternative cheaper. If those dropped $20 in price each that might change though.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #49 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 06:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Recently I have recommended the Toshiba 3TB, the Seagate 3TB and the Hitachi 3TB / 4TB models and apparently ajheib thinks that is wrong (I am not sure why), or that I have a brand preference. rolleyes.gif I doubt anyone around here has more different brands currently in operation than me. You name it and I have it. I think the only model I have never recommended once is the WD RED on this forum. I'm batting 100% on avoiding that so far because I've never come across a situation where I did not feel there was a better alternative cheaper. If those dropped $20 in price each that might change though.

No. I think that its duplicitous to claim in some threads that you shouldn't make purchasing decisions based on reliability studies that didn't include the drives in question, then turn around and give purchasing advice to someone and tell then that a particular brand is more reliable than another without any evidence to back that up. You tout the Backblaze study as a good indicator that Hitachi's are more reliable, (while completely discounting the results of Seagate being less reliable) but you're quick to hedge your statement with "but it's not very reliable or applicable in a purchase decision"

If I did that, I would feel like a huge hypocrite. But I suppose not everyone is averse to that like I am.
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #50 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 06:52 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

No doubt the Hitachi are impressive. Very impressive. The results of this (Backblaze) study would lead my to purchase one of those models if they were available for a reasonable price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

It's interesting to see the data and results but it's (the Backblaze study) not very reliable or applicable in a purchase decision. I like to look at the data, but I don't take it too seriously.

So you were really impressed and the results would lead you to purchase a Hitachi (if priced appropriately) but the results aren't very reliable or applicable for a purchasing decision.


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
assassin and jim2100 like this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #51 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 07:07 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 241
So green/5400 RPM drives "suck" (well, according to some [one] AVS member) but modern versions are faster by benchmarks than some modern 7200RPM drives which completely dispels the notion that RPM speed is in any way an indicator. Although for storage this is completely a moot point as the older drives are plenty fast enough many times over for multiple HD streams simultaneously. So in the end green/5400 RPM drives, as a whole, don't "suck" for these reasons mentioned after all especially given that this is a HTPC forum.

Check. I got that. I have been saying this for literally years.

What I am struggling with is how someone can denounce a reliability study as being inherently "flawed" and then go on to use that same study to denounce brand A while validating brand B. This logic and thinking makes absolutely no sense at all to me from a scientific perspective. Frankly, this is just poor advice.
steelman1991, ajhieb and jim2100 like this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

assassin is offline  
post #52 of 129 Old 02-05-2014, 11:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
On a happier note for Mfusick I did find something right up his alley...

I was checking out the ebay auctions from TAMSolutions (the folks offering the low-cost Norco alternative) and I stumbled across Mfusick's next scratch disk.

That's 4.5TB of Fiber Attached, 15 spindle, 10,000rpm, Hitachi goodness. Buy it now for $199. I'm sure he can dig up a FC card and a couple of cables and still come in well under budget.

You're welcome, buddy. smile.gif

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #53 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 05:12 AM
Newbie
 
mlrtime3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I don't see what all the fuss is about. When you buy a hard drive you have very little information on a model's reliability. If you are experienced you have your own anecdotal evidence that guides your purchase.

If there were actual reliability studies that did proper testing then you could use this information to base your purchase decision. Since this doesn't exist you can only go with your anecdotal evidence plus whatever reliability information you can find.

Does backblaze's blog give a definitive guide to all models and brand's reliability? no.
Should you use it to supplement the information you currently have? yes.

Anyone arguing over their method is really missing the point, of course they want to sell their service. Outside of that, it just seems like they want the most stable drive that works in their environment.

FWIW, my recent experience (drives 2-3 years old) matches backblaze. My seagates are dying faster than other brands (Hitachi/WD). I have had 3 ST3000DM001 die in the last year. What is worse is their RMA's have 100% failure rate for me so I don't even bother getting them "repaired".
assassin likes this.
mlrtime3 is offline  
post #54 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 07:50 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

On a happier note for Mfusick I did find something right up his alley...

I was checking out the ebay auctions from TAMSolutions (the folks offering the low-cost Norco alternative) and I stumbled across Mfusick's next scratch disk.

That's 4.5TB of Fiber Attached, 15 spindle, 10,000rpm, Hitachi goodness. Buy it now for $199. I'm sure he can dig up a FC card and a couple of cables and still come in well under budget.

You're welcome, buddy. smile.gif


I'll look into this thanks smile.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

So green/5400 RPM drives "suck" (well, according to some [one] AVS member) but modern versions are faster by benchmarks than some modern 7200RPM drives which completely dispels the notion that RPM speed is in any way an indicator. Although for storage this is completely a moot point as the older drives are plenty fast enough many times over for multiple HD streams simultaneously. So in the end green/5400 RPM drives, as a whole, don't "suck" for these reasons mentioned after all especially given that this is a HTPC forum.

Check. I got that. I have been saying this for literally years.

What I am struggling with is how someone can denounce a reliability study as being inherently "flawed" and then go on to use that same study to denounce brand A while validating brand B. This logic and thinking makes absolutely no sense at all to me from a scientific perspective. Frankly, this is just poor advice.

I never denounced it. The author did. I just posted for thoughts and discussion. I thought the study was interesting and I enjoyed seeing the data. I am certainly not denouncing it, but I would take the information with a grain of salt and weigh into things with many other factors.

Like I said, if Hitachi did well I think that speaks something about them. Hard to "denounce" anything about that. You can fault them for doing well regardless of how good or bad the study was. That my point. If you have a serious take away that is probably the easiest one to swallow ( at least for me)

On the matters of Seagate, if you subtract out the 25% failure rate on the really old models that no one buys anymore anyways I think you might bet a more realistic number. Looks like with the 3TB and 4TB modern the average of them is somewhere near 6% ??? (4% something and 9% something ? I forget exactly) So they clearly are less reliable for backblaze in the confines of their set up. But if you are not using a backblaze storage pod at home who is to say you will see or experience the same ??? Probably you would not.

WD seems pretty good on the 1TB models (really old) but middle of the pack on the RED models and they only tested 346 with average age 6 months. Lots can happen still. Not conclusive to me, certainly not as conclusive as Hitachi's thousands and thousands tested and average age 1.5-2 years and 1% failure rate. The RED seems to be about the same as the 4TB seagate people are currently buying.

I disagree with you when you say this:
Quote:
What I am struggling with is how someone can denounce a reliability study as being inherently "flawed" and then go on to use that same study to denounce brand A while validating brand B. This logic and thinking makes absolutely no sense at all to me from a scientific perspective. Frankly, this is just poor advice.

some clarification is in order:

-The authors words are not mine. Because I posted it does not mean I agree or wrote it. There is parts I think are interesting, but this article is no more valid to me than the study (possibly less). Don't assume things (at least about me)
- I still do fully believe that if Hitachi did well then that shows something. Hard to denounce that (which is effectively pointing at them saying they are not reliable) without any data to suggest otherwise. This is the most valid takeway IMO.
- On the matters of "denounce" or in relation to Seagate I'm generally appreciative of the information from the study but it does not mean I think Seagate is as bad as they suggest, and I would still buy them if the price was right. It's just information I might use to make a decision. If the Toshiba or Hitachi or WD 7200rpm models were the same price as the Seagate I might use that to sway my decision towards them, but I certainly would not pay tons more unless I was getting something tangible (like 5 year warranty on Hitachi).

"from a scientific perspective" - cut this crap out. Unless you are a scientist studying these lets look at it from a consumer perspective of deciding about buying them. They two are very different and I don't think there is enough access to data and resources to go down that "scientific" road and find adequate conclusion. It's so easy to poke holes in something, but that never means the other option is stronger/better. You like to throw stones, but all these hard drives are glass houses. If you break one, it doesn't mean the others won't break either.

This stuff is not black and white regardless of how bad we want it to be that way. You can't denounce the study, and you can't rely on it with absolute certainty. What you can do is take the information and use it as another piece of information to weigh in your personal decision. Nothing more. Seagate is not as bad as the Seagate bashers want you to believe, and unless you are buying the exact model in the study you are not even likely to see the same results. Any of the new model Seagates (like the 4TB they tested) or the new NAS lines are likely just as good or better than the other brands. Just like if you bought a different Hitachi model it might not be the same as the models backblaze tested, even though Hitachi seems pretty consistent. And if you bought something like a WD GREEN (which they do not test because they throw too many errors and don't work for them) you would likely have nothing like the WD results they are posting. Same if you bought a 4TB RED which they did not test either.

I'm not sure how my suggesting weighting the information carefully along with other factors and intended use is "frankly poor advice" You have a terrible habit of trying to twist my words in an effort to seem 100% right on a subject it's hard for anyone to be right about 100%.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #55 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 11:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

Like I said, if Hitachi did well I think that speaks something about them. Hard to "denounce" anything about that. You can fault them for doing well regardless of how good or bad the study was. That my point. If you have a serious take away that is probably the easiest one to swallow ( at least for me)

Here's the problems I have with your statements you've made thus far.

You say that you' were so impressed with Hitachi's performance in the study that it would lead you to purchase Hitachi drives in the future. Then you turn around and a few hours later in the same thread say that the results of the study shouldn't influence purchasing decisions.

That's pretty much the exact opposite of what you'd said a few hours prior.

Furthermore you've claimed that you shouldn't really put too much stock into reliability studies based on manufacturer, and that reliability of exact models is much better indicator. Then you claim that some random Hitachi drives should be more reliable based on some different models tested in the Backblaze study, which is bad enough on its own, but you also dismiss the results of some Seagate drives despite the fact that they are the exact model that has been discussed on here.

I also find it interesting that you mention drive "shucking" as something that could adversely affect a drive's reliability (at least when trying to argue the invalidity of the Seagate results) but I seem to recall you being a big advocate of drive shucking in other threads. Is it just me or is that a little odd?
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #56 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 01:20 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

some clarification is in order:

-The authors words are not mine. Because I posted it does not mean I agree or wrote it. There is parts I think are interesting, but this article is no more valid to me than the study (possibly less). Don't assume things (at least about me)
- I still do fully believe that if Hitachi did well then that shows something. Hard to denounce that (which is effectively pointing at them saying they are not reliable) without any data to suggest otherwise. This is the most valid takeway IMO.
- On the matters of "denounce" or in relation to Seagate I'm generally appreciative of the information from the study but it does not mean I think Seagate is as bad as they suggest, and I would still buy them if the price was right. It's just information I might use to make a decision. If the Toshiba or Hitachi or WD 7200rpm models were the same price as the Seagate I might use that to sway my decision towards them, but I certainly would not pay tons more unless I was getting something tangible (like 5 year warranty on Hitachi).

..."from a scientific perspective" - cut this crap out.

...

I'm not sure how my suggesting weighting the information carefully along with other factors and intended use is "frankly poor advice" You have a terrible habit of trying to twist my words in an effort to seem 100% right on a subject it's hard for anyone to be right about 100%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

You say that you' were so impressed with Hitachi's performance in the study that it would lead you to purchase Hitachi drives in the future. Then you turn around and a few hours later in the same thread say that the results of the study shouldn't influence purchasing decisions.

I am with ajhieb on this one. You completely contradicted yourself on this entire subject yet when we point it out you completely backtrack and once again try to make it "about you".

Also it continues to be quite obvious that you put absolutely no stock into the idea of scientific theory (and I am not just talking about this example) in an AV Science forum no less.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

assassin is offline  
post #57 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 01:32 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 22,873
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 166 Post(s)
Liked: 834
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post


I am with ajhieb on this one. You completely contradicted yourself on this entire subject yet when we point it out you completely backtrack and once again try to make it "about you".

Also it continues to be quite obvious that you put absolutely no stock into the idea of scientific theory (and I am not just talking about this example) in an AV Science forum no less.

I would expect nothing less from you. But when it comes to buying a hard drive that's not science. It's never going to be. Even if you wanted to make it science you lack the resources and information necessary to do it. So until this changes lets just be honest about what this is. It's not science it's just opinion. You make these statements thinking it makes you look right but it really makes you look foolish because there is no science on these matters. No scientific theory on hard drives is going to prove me wrong or you correct; it's just never going to happen. Reccomending one hard drive at one point, then the next day reccomending a different one to someone else is not back tracking. I do it all the time, yes you are right. But I generally think they are all the same. A hard drive is a hard drive. If one is cheaper I'll recommend that one usually. Sometimes that is Seagate, sometimes it's Hitachi, sometimes it's Toshiba. Sometimes (not often) it's even WD in which case I have actually recommended them too.

You both want to take what I say and hold it up as eternal truth and if I say something else you quickly scream "that not what you think" and then try to tell me or suggest you actually know what I think. Why make it so personal ? Can't we just talk about hard drives ? Or the study ? or HTPC tech ? You always want to make it about me. You are especially motivated to do this when I speak out against how poor a choice I believe WD 5400rpm hard drives are. How about just posting why they might be good ? Leave it at that. If you are really right then I should look like an idiot (that's what you want right?) and you don't need to get your hands dirty with personal attacks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajhieb View Post

Here's the problems I have with your statements you've made thus far.

You say that you' were so impressed with Hitachi's performance in the study that it would lead you to purchase Hitachi drives in the future. Then you turn around and a few hours later in the same thread say that the results of the study shouldn't influence purchasing decisions.

That's pretty much the exact opposite of what you'd said a few hours prior.

I never said that. I have never said that any of this should not influence a purchase decision. I think it's all information that should be carefully weighed along with everything else. I just said that above ^ and I never said it shouldn't influence purchasing decisions, I think it could. It would influence mine to favor Hitachi if given the chance against other options. And... I think the on the Seagate issue should have an influence too, I just was expressing that it was not enough influence mine to make me stop buying them. Other folks might be different. I would still buy Seagate drives in the future, but that does not mean it did not influence my decision. If given a choice between a Seagate and a Hitachi for the same price I'd probably choose the Hitachi. I'd probably choose the Toshiba for the same price too. But if the Seagate is cheaper then the Seagate it is.

The only thing I said that you seem to understand well is that I dislike WD 5400rpm drives. The rest of this stuff I think you get confused and you hang on every word looking for an area of contention. Like I expressed earlier (I think I deleted it actually) I don't understand why you care so much. I'm really just some idiot on the internet giving opinion on a hard drive. Doesn't this seem kind of stupid to you that you get so personally invested in this ? You must really love WD RED and GREEN drives if you worry about me influencing other peoples opinions on them so much. I can't for the life of me understand any other reason why your personal motivation on these issues is so high. 99% of the people would have just ignored me and moved on if they don't agree. I think you actually have a stronger brand preference for WD RED and GREEN than I do a dislike for them. That must mean you really, really like them. It's the only reasonable explanation I can come up with that we have the same battle over and over again.

At some point you and I are going to need to let this go and agree to disagree. I know how you and Asassin feel (you both see nothing wrong with WD 5400rpm drives and like them) and I think you both understand I don't like them. I'm basically going to recommend any drive other than them if I can help it (Toshiba, Hitachi, Seagate etc) because I think the WD 5400rpm generally suck. You both disagree. You both don't seem to care if you overspend for nothing or get a slow drive because the performance is not a big deal to you. I hate both overspending, and lower performance. I don't have any brand preference at all, I'd buy any brand including WD (non 5400rpm) happily . For some reason you both feel the need to defend WD 5400rpm drives every time I speak out about my dislike and disgust for them. We need to call a spade a spade here and just openly admit two things. First, you want me to be wrong and point out when I am which personally motivates you; second, you personally like WD 5400rpm RED and GREEN drives and feel the need to defend them. I think if I can openly admit my bias and dislike for WD 5400rpm drives, and you can openly admit your bias against me, and also your preference for WD drives we might actually be able to put this thing to bed. We don't have to agree and it's pretty obvious we never will. The biggest gripe I have is you and Assassin resort to making it personal against me, and think that if you attack me personally you somehow invalidate my opinion. You can't keep me out of it, or seperate the hard drive talk from talk about me. That is quite annoying, and I don't believe I have ever once attacked your opinion or you personally on this forum. Have I ??

If you want to balance against my opinion then stick to talking about hard drives. If you want to present WD 5400rpm drives in a positive light then post some reasons why you like them, or some things about them that might make them good and let others decide what they believe. This forum is about talking about PC hardware and HTPC tech, but it's not so much about talking about me and you. If I voice an opinion or post something you think is a mistake then present your side, your product, your opinion. It's a much better alternative to this personal bickering. I need to cut my losses with you, this can't continue it's an epic waste of time and constant annoyance for everyone. No good will come from it. Just please consider talking more about HTPC products and your own personal opinion and less about mine or what you think I might think about something. How about just what you think about it ?? Leave it at that. I'd respect you a lot more if you actually voiced your own opinion rather than trying to constantly slander mine because you don't agree with it.
BllDo likes this.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #58 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 01:35 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I would expect nothing less from you. But when it comes to buying a hard drive that's not science. It's never going to be. Even if you wanted to make it science you lack the resources and information necessary to do it. So until this changes lets just be honest about what this is. It's not science it's just opinion. You make these statements thinking it makes you look right but it really makes you look foolish because there is no science on these matters. No scientific theory on hard drives is going to prove me wrong or you correct; it's just never going to happen.

What? I am talking about scientific theory in general. I don't think that you really grasp it to be honest which shows in many of your posts, this one included, which really leads to a lot of misinformation.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

assassin is offline  
post #59 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 01:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

I never said that. I have never said that any of this should not influence a purchase decision.

Ummm....Yes. Yes you did. People's Exhibit A:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

No doubt the Hitachi are impressive. Very impressive. The results of this (Backblaze) study would lead my to purchase one of those models if they were available for a reasonable price.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

It's interesting to see the data and results but it's (the Backblaze study) not very reliable or applicable in a purchase decision. I like to look at the data, but I don't take it too seriously.

You'll notice the part I bolded.

Quote:
The only thing I said that you seem to understand well is that I dislike WD 5400rpm drives.

Why even bring this up again?


Quote:
The rest of this stuff I think you get confused and you hang on every word looking for an area of contention. Like I expressed earlier (I think I deleted it actually) I don't understand why you care so much. I'm really just some idiot on the internet giving opinion on a hard drive. Doesn't this seem kind of stupid to you that you get so personally invested in this ? You must really love WD RED and GREEN drives if you worry about me influencing other peoples opinions on them so much. I can't for the life of me understand any other reason why your personal motivation on these issues is so high. 99% of the people would have just ignored me and moved on if they don't agree. I think you actually have a stronger brand preference for WD RED and GREEN than I do a dislike for them. That must mean you really, really like them. It's the only reasonable explanation I can come up with that we have the same battle over and over again.

I don't own, nor have I ever purchased a WD Green or Red drive. I have no particular affection for them at all. What I do have an affection for is sound logic and reason.

You can rant about the WD 5400rpm drives all you want. Personally I don't really care about them. I don't care about the drives at all. What I care about is people making overly broad and logically unsound generalizations and passing them off under the premise of good advice. I'm not defending WD. I'm defending logic and reason.

When confronted, do you eventually acknowledge the caveats of your generalizations? Sure. Do you then turn right around and make the same generalizations (sans caveats) again? Yeah, and that's why people continue to call you out on it again and again, because you keep offering the same faulty logic again and again.
assassin likes this.

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
post #60 of 129 Old 02-06-2014, 01:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ajhieb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,401
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked: 386
Hey mfusick, do you get email notifications every time someone quotes you in a post?

RAID protection is only for failed drives. That's it. It's no replacement for a proper backup.
ajhieb is online now  
Reply Home Theater Computers

Tags
Seagate , Seagate Hard Drives , Seagate Stbv4000100 4tb Expansion Desktop Drive , Western Digital , Ocz Technology , Ocz Vertex 4 Vtx4 25sat3 256g 2 5 Mlc Internal Solid State Drive Ssd , Ocz Technology Vector 150 Series 120gb 2 5 Inch Sata Iii Internal Solid State Drive With 3 5 Inch Ad , Ocz Technology 256g Vertex 450 Series Sata 6 0 Gb S 2 5 Inch 7mm Height Sold State Drive Ssd With Ac , Ocz Technology 128g Vertex 450 Series Sata 6 0 Gb S 2 5 Inch 7mm Height Sold State Drive Ssd With Ac , Ocz Technology 128gb Vertex 4 Series Sata 6 0 Gb S 2 5 Inch Solid State Drive Ssd With Industrys Hig , Ocz Technology 256gb Vector Series Sata 6 0 Gb S 7 Mm Height 2 5 Inch Ssd With 100k Iops And 5 Year , Ocz Technology 128gb Vector Series Sata 6 0 Gb S 7 Mm Height 2 5 Inch Ssd With 95k Iops And 5 Year W
Gear in this thread - Stbv4000100 by PriceGrabber.com

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off